Fix spec #5
Fix spec #5
Conversation
…e is properly resolved, and still yields a promise for `argument`.
ljharb
force-pushed
the
fix_spec
branch
2 times, most recently
from
09be010 to
ecbbf91
Compare
ljharb
force-pushed
the
fix_spec
branch
2 times, most recently
from
ad71038 to
e325825
Compare
|
@domenic any thoughts on this solution? |
| 1. let _handlerResult_ be Call(_handler_, *undefined*, « »). | ||
| 1. If _handlerResult_ is not an abrupt completion, then | ||
| 1. Let _handlerPromise_ be ? PromiseResolve(%Promise%, _handlerResult_.[[Value]]). | ||
| 1. Let _argumentThunk_ be equivalent to a function that returns _argument_. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
neat, but can this be described like this without it being considered a layering violation? (I honestly don't know) @domenic ?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This text is identical to text that used to be in the spec prior to tc39/ecma262#584 so I'm pretty sure it's OK. Not sure what you mean by "layering violation" tho?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Seems good then, it just seemed like it was describing language semantics with those semantics. But if its based on prior art we are likely good.
| @@ -356,7 +356,7 @@ <h1 class="title">Promise.prototype.finally</h1> | |||
| </emu-alg> | |||
| </emu-clause> | |||
|
|
|||
| <!-- es6num="25.4.1.8" --> | |||
| <!-- es6num="25.4.4.5" --> | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@bterlson this seems to have changed between when I initially wrote this PR and now. Was this intentional? I thought "es6num" values were supposed to stay constant forever?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It's 25.4.4.5 in the spec now, so presumably this change is fine. Not sure where 25.4.1.8 came from. It should remain unchanged from ES6.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Unless I copy-paste-errored, 25.4.1.8 is what it was when I first copied the spec steps for Promise.resolve and started writing this PR. Hopefully it's unchanged and I just messed it up :-)
Attempt to fix #2 and close #1.
Spec HTML viewable here
This attempts to fix the spec by: